United Airlines drags passenger off plane to make room for employees

[Seamus]

I imagine most of you have read about this by now...

http://<iframe width="560" height="...og" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I'm not flying United anymore

Response from Southwest airlines:

 

[SocietyoftheSpectacle]

A united Airlines Training Video has been leaked,

 

[Anamarija]

RT published yesterday that after the incident United Airlines stock is falling:

United Airlines stock plummeted by over $800mn after passenger fiasco

The stock price of United Continental Holdings Inc. fell dramatically for hours on Tuesday amid the fallout over the airline’s handling of a passenger being dragged off one of its US flights.

At one point, the stock value dropped to the tune of over $800 million.

The company’s stock price opened at $70.15 Tuesday as the markets were largely unmoved by the scandal on Monday. However, it later plummeted to $68.37, a fall of more than 4 percent, before climbing again to close at $70.71.

The market drop follows an incident in which a United passenger was forcibly ejected from an overbooked flight from Chicago to Kentucky.

Footage shot by other passengers showed the man screaming and struggling as airport police removed him from his seat and pulled him down the aisle of the aircraft. Later videos showed him back on board the aircraft with a bloodied face and appearing disoriented.

The airline came in for widespread criticism over the incident online with social media users expressing disgust at how the passenger was treated and pledging not to fly with United again.

The incident was particularly poorly received in China where people claimed that the man was discriminated against because he appears to be of Asian descent. The video was the top trending item on Chinese social media site Weibo on Tuesday.

In a letter to employees United Chief Executive Officer Oscar Munoz said that the passenger had "defied" security officers, Reuters reported.

“We sought volunteers and then followed our involuntary denial of boarding process (including offering up to $1,000 in compensation),” Munoz wrote. "When we approached one of these passengers to explain apologetically that he was being denied boarding, he raised his voice and refused to comply with crew member instructions.”

By market close on Tuesday, the airline’s fortunes had improved somewhat, with its share price reaching 70.71, an overall drop of 1.1 percent.

 

[Arwenn]

The article is up on SoTT now, with updates. Social media and smart phones do have their uses! There has been a serious backlash on social media over this (& I must say, it was pretty disgusting & totally unacceptable behaviour from United Airlines) with the CEO tweeting apologies for the incident. The passenger that was hauled off, has now hired a high profile personal injury lawyer.

https://www.sott.net/article/347746-Disturbing-footage-United-Airlines-have-police-drag-doctor-off-overbooked-flight-Update

 

[Anamarija]

The passenger that was hauled off, has now hired a high profile personal injury lawyer.

Even that is not nice, sometime is really satisfying to see when 'bad guy' (United Airlines) get what he is 'deserved'.

 

[Beorn]

Who in their right mind would think that's an appropriate solution to the problem? It seems they've lost all common sense and decency.

 

[JEEP]

Was the passenger targeted for 're-accommodation' selected due to his known (by authorities) checkered past & would thus be easily intimidated & less likely to resist leaving the plane?

Victim in United Flight Debacle Gets Smear Treatment
How dredging up his irrelevant criminal background will be used to justify censorship.

You would think that an elderly doctor (69 years old!) being filmed getting dragged by police off a United airplane in order to make room for the airline employees would be immune to the "He's no angel" defense of government violence.

You would be wrong, though, and underestimating the willingness of media outlets to publish anything that has the potential to get them attention, even negative attention. Everybody's got a past that can be used against them.

It has become a common practice that when a citizen has a very public, highly publicized encounter with law enforcement, his or her criminal background very quickly ends up in the hands of local media outlets.

Sometimes it's relevant. If a criminal suspect gets wounded or killed in a confrontation with police, a history of convictions for violent crimes helps put it in context. It doesn't inherently mean the police's behavior was justified in any particular instance, but it is important information. And the public should know.

But sometimes it's clearly an attempt to make the person subjected to police aggression look guilty in the eyes of the public and shield the authorities from criticism for bad behavior.

All of that is to say the Courier-Journal in Kentucky got its hands on the criminal and licensing background of the guy that got forcibly yanked (and injured) by Chicago police off that United flight, and it turns out this David Dao fellow did some bad things, more than a decade ago. But they've decided to dredge it up anyway:

Dao, who went to medical school in Vietnam in the 1970s before moving to the U.S., was working as a pulmonologist in Elizabethtown when he was arrested in 2003 and eventually convicted of drug-related offenses after an undercover investigation, according to documents filed with the Kentucky Board of Medical Licensure last June. The documents allege that he was involved in fraudulent prescriptions for controlled substances and was sexually involved with a patient who used to work for his practice and assisted police in building a case against him.

Dao was convicted of multiple felony counts of obtaining drugs by fraud or deceit in November 2004 and was placed on five years of supervised probation in January 2005. He surrendered his medical license the next month.

The Kentucky Board of Medical Licensure permitted Dao to resume practicing medicine in 2015 under certain conditions.

None of this provides any contextual information useful to understanding Dao's refusal to comply with United. It's a smear. There's no reason to believe any of it is not true, but it is not journalism that provides any actually useful context about Dao. They can't even say he was misleading the airline when he said he had patients to treat as an explanation for his refusal to disembark "voluntarily."

Read the rest of the article here:
_http://reason.com/blog/2017/04/11/victim-in-united-flight-debacle-gets-sme

I saw another link also reporting on Dao's criminal past including the 'gay' aspect of it as well. Funny how he was picked to be removed from the plane. OR is this all part of a grander scheme to instill fear all the time & in all places. The authorities can get you anytime/anywhere they please so you better obey!

I saw a comment noting that the $800 offer that everyone refused that then led to the attack incident turned into a $800,000,000 loss for United. Instant karma?

 

[luc]

Who in their right mind would think that's an appropriate solution to the problem? It seems they've lost all common sense and decency.

Yeah, the whole incident is so bizarre: first, if I understood correctly, no one in the plane said (before the whole drama started), "okay, I'll take the next flight, for god's sake" - I mean it's impossible that everyone was so busy that they couldn't take another flight! Of course, when the thing started escalating, that would have been the moment for some people to get over themselves and say "hey, let me take another flight, just leave the guy alone!" Apparently not.

As for the airline, there's no words. Drawing numbers is really a bad move here. At least they could have "bribed" the people out of the plane, like offering a discount or a free ice cream or whatever to anybody who's willing to leave.

Signs of the times I suppose. To be fair though, I can't say for certain that I would have behaved decently in this situation, and that's a very scary thought!!

 

[Martina]

I think more of such events will escalate around the world since neofascism is showing it's face more daring every day.
Sorry if I'm overdramatic again :) but I can't stand violence and stupidity (including mine).

 

[Gawan]

The United Airlines got a history of atrocitys against passengers already:

United Airlines boots American family from flight because of 'how they looked'

Disabled man forced to crawl off plane after being left with no wheelchair

United Airlines forces woman to switch seats after 'Pakistani monks' say they can't sit near her

There is also a comment from a reader under one recent sott article, though I don't know if it is really the case here:

The man was approved for boarding, which means he purchased a ticket and agreed to all those things nobody reads when purchasing airline tickets. Read the typical ticket agreement and you'll realize his refusal to leave the plane when requested to do so, irrespective his feelings about it, was an act of HIM breaching contract, not the Airline; thus, the Airlines right for recourse, however barbaric.

Of course and as the commentator stated the Airline behaved still barbaric, no matter what was signed and is not an excuse imo.

 

[Ant22]

(...)
I saw another link also reporting on Dao's criminal past including the 'gay' aspect of it as well. Funny how he was picked to be removed from the plane. OR is this all part of a grander scheme to instill fear all the time & in all places. The authorities can get you anytime/anywhere they please so you better obey!

I saw a comment noting that the $800 offer that everyone refused that then led to the attack incident turned into a $800,000,000 loss for United. Instant karma?

Oh, so the airline's staff behaviour was less outrageous because the victim's past wasn't squeaky clean? Victim shaming indeed. Gosh, since I have a track record of smoking cigarettes in the toilet when I was in highschool and a couple of driving tickets I guess I should consider horseback travel just to be on the safeside

The apology offered by the airline's CEO is quite outrageous too:

https://www.rt.com/usa/384398-united-airline-ceo-sorry/

The CEO of United Continental has apologized for the airline’s handling of a passenger who was forcibly removed from a flight in Chicago. The incident caused media outrage and the airline to lose millions of dollars, as its stock tumbled.
“I deeply apologize to the customer forcibly removed and to all the customers aboard,” United Chief Executive Officer Oscar Munoz said in a statement on Tuesday afternoon. “No one should ever be mistreated this way.”

“I want you to know that we take full responsibility and we will work to make it right,” Munoz said, promising a review or airline’s policies on crew movement, volunteer incentives, oversold flights and interactions with law enforcement, to be concluded by the end of April.

“It's never too late to do the right thing. I have committed to our customers and our employees that we are going to fix what's broken so this never happens again,” Munoz said.

A video that emerged Monday showed a bloodied man being dragged off a United flight from Chicago, Illinois to Louisville, Kentucky after he refused to give up his seat to a company’s crew member, after the flight finished boarding. United demanded four volunteers to give up their seats, and then randomly removed four ticketed passengers, in apparent breach of its own policies.

The company then made matters even worse, when Munoz responded by apologizing “for having to re-accommodate these customers.” He also tried to blame the passenger, who “raised his voice and refused to comply with crew member instructions” after crew attempted to “explain apologetically that he was being denied boarding.”

United Continental shares took a nosedive on Monday evening, continuing into the trading on Tuesday, losing the company hundreds of millions in market capitalization. United also became a butt of jokes on social media.

His choice of words just adds insult to injury.

Here's a nice selection of online trolling that followed the incident and the applology: https://www.rt.com/viral/384326-united-airlines-trolled-ceo-defends-employees/

 

[scotseeker]

And now this as a follow up, United just doesn't care about their paying customers! Man in first class was threatened with handcuffs to make room for a "high priority" passenger, he was already in his seat!

http://www.latimes.com/business/lazarus/la-fi-lazarus-united-low-priority-passenger-20170412-story.html

 

[Seamus]

Who in their right mind would think that's an appropriate solution to the problem? It seems they've lost all common sense and decency.

Yeah, the whole incident is so bizarre: first, if I understood correctly, no one in the plane said (before the whole drama started), "okay, I'll take the next flight, for god's sake" - I mean it's impossible that everyone was so busy that they couldn't take another flight! Of course, when the thing started escalating, that would have been the moment for some people to get over themselves and say "hey, let me take another flight, just leave the guy alone!" Apparently not.

I had the same thought. I think I would have offered to take the travel vouchers and get off the plane, its hard to believe no one did that. Its possible someone tried to but the police wouldn't let them interrupt once they engaged with this man. Anyway, I'm glad I wasn't there in person, its bad enough to watch on the video!

 

[hlat]

There is also a comment from a reader under one recent sott article, though I don't know if it is really the case here:

The man was approved for boarding, which means he purchased a ticket and agreed to all those things nobody reads when purchasing airline tickets. Read the typical ticket agreement and you'll realize his refusal to leave the plane when requested to do so, irrespective his feelings about it, was an act of HIM breaching contract, not the Airline; thus, the Airlines right for recourse, however barbaric.

Of course and as the commentator stated the Airline behaved still barbaric, no matter what was signed and is not an excuse imo.

No, I don't think the contract terms allow removal AFTER a passenger has boarded and seated. There's a big night and day difference between denial of boarding (in the terminal and not being allowed to enter the aircraft) and removal after a passenger is boarded and seated.

Also, it doesn't matter what a contract says if what the contract says is illegal (eg contract to kill).

The airline is going to be paying money to the passenger to settle the lawsuit, and I wouldn't be surprised if it's in the millions of dollars.

 

[Ant22]

(...)

The man was approved for boarding, which means he purchased a ticket and agreed to all those things nobody reads when purchasing airline tickets. Read the typical ticket agreement and you'll realize his refusal to leave the plane when requested to do so, irrespective his feelings about it, was an act of HIM breaching contract, not the Airline; thus, the Airlines right for recourse, however barbaric.

Of course and as the commentator stated the Airline behaved still barbaric, no matter what was signed and is not an excuse imo.

I guess the SOTT reader who shared this information didn't provide any sources showing that this is in fact in the airline's terms and conditions? I came across this article that shows airlines can legally overbook flights. And in case of overbooking the only option for the flight to take off is to remove passengers from the flight.

As physically abusive as the airline's behaviour was, I can imagine airlines do cover their back with appropriate points in their terms and conditions that allow them to get people off the flight.

This of course still doesn't make the way they did it any better at all. Well, unless they put "by any means" in their Ts&Cs (which would only surprise me a little).

In a logical world there would also be a clause stating that they agree to reimburse the passenger for any losses incurred as a result of not being able to take the flight due to their practice of overbooking. But hey, we are not exactly living in a logical world.


https://www.rt.com/usa/384492-chris-christie-united-airlines/

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has called for the immediate suspension of the federal regulation allowing airlines to overbook flights and remove passengers, in the wake of the United Airlines controversy.
The governor wrote to US Secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao on Tuesday to ask for the suspension, specifically citing the recent “actions of United Airlines” as shining a spotlight on the “abusive practice” of overbooking flights and bumping passengers.

“This conduct is abusive and outrageous. The ridiculous statements, now in their third version, of the CEO of United Airlines displays their callousness toward the travelling public with the permission of the federal government,” Christie said in a statement.

“I know the Trump Administration wants to reform regulations to help the American people. This would be a great place to start.”

Christie went on to say New Jersey is “examining the ways it could curtail this abusive practice”, but requires the federal government to take immediate action. UA controls 70 percent of the flights in and out of New Jersey’s Newark airport.

United Airlines has come under immense pressure after removing a passenger from an overbooked flight from Chicago to Louisville on Sunday, and for its handling of the situation afterward.

Footage of aviation officers forcefully removing the man from his chair, after refusing to vacate his seat, caused international outrage.The airline’s stock plummeted by $800 million on Tuesday as the fallout from the controversy continued.

As physically abusive as the airline's behaviour was, it looks like removing passengers from overbooked flights is simply common practice. I travel by plane relatively frequently and somehow I never heard of this.

http://<iframe width="560" height="...DI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>